Do you agree that people should have the right to buy one and only one house?

[foxsquirrell]

This is so that many more people can afford to buy there own home, instead of allowing few people to buy as much property as they want in order to squeeze the rent out of people into their own pockets.

And by buying many properties these few people dry the market from houses, and thereby skyrocketing the price of any remaining houses for sale.

Don't get me wrong in the title. People can sell there house and buy another one as many times as they like. But at any given time, they can only have one house in there name.

Surely there will be the need to pass laws, and take care of certain issues that might arise, but the gist is clear. Do you agree with it, with the whole concept?

Yes, I agree

No, I disagree

[Goforit1010]

I disagree with your point. This is America. We can buy what we can afford. There is NO "right" to buy a house, and I certainly would NOT support any Constitutional Ammendment for that. If I can afford a dozen houses, why prevent me from owning them? I can set the rent to anything I want. People still have the option of paying it or not. A LOT of times, that rent is set fairly high to scare away slobs from living in the house and tearing it up.

Some people are very good about handling their money, others... outright stupid is the only way to describe what they do. My wife and I take extremely good care of what we earn. We bought a house and now it's paid for. Even if it wasn't, we'd still be responsible for the mortgage.

The way many young people are horrible about handling student debt, they shouldn't be trusted with a mortgage.

Better still, stop the illegal aliens and MORE housing would be available for US citizens.

[foxsquirrell]

It does not matter which country it is. What I am saying will have the same effect anywhere in the world, even on the moon if there was a property market on the moon. YES there is a right to buy a house (and how much you want for that matter as it is now). OR put it differently there is no law which prevents you from doing so, which is the subject I am talking about, and I am giving the reasons why.

You asked WHY prevent you from buying a dozen houses if you can afford them? I SAID WHY in the explanation under the main question. Because by doing so you increase the prices of houses and thereby decrease the opportunity for others to buy a house/property. And then if they buy 12 houses for example they will do so normally so they can rent eleven houses, enslave 11 people to work for them, and live in one house. I am talking about the whole picture, the macro economic scene.

With regards to the rest of your argument about some people spending money foolishly, I don't know what bearing does that have with my argument. I mean are you arguing that if there are people who don't know how to be careful with money then let me buy as money houses and land as I like. It does not make sense.

ONE HOUSE IS ENOUGH FOR ANYONE. He who wants to make money goes to work, not enslave other people with rent. That is THE MODERN FORM OF SLAVERY.

Good day sir.

[Goforit1010]

Fine... then let's take illegal aliens. There are roughly 30 million of them in the US right now, maybe more! They're definitely not ALL living on the streets. Even if you have a dozen of them at a time living in the same house, that means the US housing market is drying up at a ridiculously high rate. So tell me, what's the availability of houses for people, if illegal aliens are eating into the available housing market? What do YOU think will be the result of the cost of housing? The law of supply and demand applies here.

Back to my original idea. If I can afford a dozen homes, why limit me to only... one? What if my business is supplying rental homes for people? You're saying I can only own one? That's a pretty dumb idea.

[foxsquirrell]

Illegal aliens I agree that they should be deported or arrested so that the message is sent out to people wanting to do monkey business. It is interesting how you use the term illegal aliens. I think it is something quite American. Is that how you refer to people there who do not have the necessary documents to reside and work there? Aliens! But lets leave this aside. For you know even if there were not those illegal aliens, and still the few own the most property and live off the many. That I oppose with the strictest and utmost way possible.
To answer your last question, it is very simple. If you can't own more than one house, and if you can't rent but only inside your one house if you wish to do so, of course the last thing that would be possible (imaginable) is to have a business renting property! There will no such private businesses.
For those who still can't afford to buy a house there will be a rental market but only run and operated in the strictest way by the government. No such thing can be private in the case I am talking about.
So please do not rush to say that an idea is dumb!

[Goforit1010]

Illegal aliens... the vast majority of Americans are fine with LEGAL immigrants. Every country has laws about immigration. Just follow them is what we're wanting, not entering the country illegally. Then occupying a chunk of it, never learning our language, using our schools, housing/apartments, committing crimes of all sorts and so on.

America is a BIG place. Very wealthy people have 2, 3, 4, sometimes even more homes. Depending where in the country you live, many people have a house and some also have a cabin on a lake too.

The vast majority of Americans would absolutely HATE the Gov't controlling the housing and rental market. It's not their job, and according to our laws, not the job of the Gov't. Its OK for the Gov't to create laws to allow everyone an equal opportunity, but not controlling who gets a house and who doesn't.

We look at homes the same way other people look at cars, or TV's, or even pets. If you can afford it, have at it. In truth, less than 5% of Americans own more than a single home. We're a wealthy nation, but not THAT wealthy.

[foxsquirrell]

I sympathies with you on the first part. That is to say migrants should integrate with the society they migrate too. And not pretend and feel that they have the right to do as they are used to do where they come from. And I don't care about human rights when it comes to this. I mean I think the old and simple Roman dictum " When you are in Rome you do as the Romans do!", is scripture to my mind, and prevails over human rights in this regard. If they don't like it they go back from where they came.
But that is one point. On the property issue I already made my point, and I don't think I should say again because I would be merely repeating myself.

There is one other thing I wish to highlight, which I observe here in Malta as well. Yes promote equality, and equal opportunities, BUT when it comes to property - that is to say the REAL DEAL, since it carries by FAR the heaviest burden, because lots of money is involved - then we make exceptions one way or the other. Its all a collusion if you ask me, even if it is a tacit one, between people in power basically.

In time maybe things will improve. Because people as a whole will come to realize that it is us who make our lives better. It is us who improve society and the environment we live in. It us who advance technology in every field. But to do so we have to unlock human potential. And to unlock human potential as much as possible there can't be the few who hoard the vast majority of the resources for themselves and live others struggling to make ends meet when they can be much better off if things where more balanced. Balance is a virtue.

To conclude equality can never be because people are not born equal (That's why I agree with eugenics). One who is more capable will naturally be better off, normally. But at least society in the future will hopefully be much more balanced, and therefore a more thriving and happier society.

[Sun_Kim-Ai]

No, because I don't rent to anyone.
The first house is to live with my wife and children the second residence is my private retreat from everyone.
I'm looking to get a third house, an estate on the mountains, to serve as a last retreat.

[foxsquirrell]

But even if you do not rent, people who own a second and third home eat up the supply which increases the price. Not sure about these retreats though. If they are small houses in the middle of nowhere in the midst of vast areas of land it does not really fall into what I had in mind. Im talking more about densely populated areas. Towns and cities. One can rent if he wishes his own house. But not buy another one and another one to skim the rent from people and at the same time decreasing the opportunity to buy a house.

[foxsquirrell]

Any other rent should be government run.

[purplepoppy]

There's a big problem here with people buying summer holiday homes and leaving them empty most the year. It's pricing locals out of their own areas and turning them into ghost towns.

[foxsquirrell]

Good point! Glad you mentioned it.

[NamerOfStars]

Of course not; that doesn't make any sense. People who buy more than one house are people who have the money to. Those who don't won't magically be able to just because the supply increases. If anything, the price would go UP, because the projected profits for building a house would go down.

[foxsquirrell]

No, no magic involved I totally agree. But yes a greater number of people would afford to buy a house if the prices of houses go down. That is a fact. With regards to house prices going down or not if more houses are more available, I think that the prices will go down simply because there will be more abundant. You disagree. Either me or you is incorrect on this point what can I say.

[NamerOfStars]

You can say "Why wouldn't lowering demand lower the price?", for one. The thing is, houses aren't like., say, cars: you can't hold one on a lot unownud fol years and net see *major* deterioration, plus building onk is a massive undertaking. You generally only see them built when there's serious anticipated demand.

Plus, not everyone lives in houses- you'd see for more people choosing other ways to invest.